Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755376AbXL1A03 (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Dec 2007 19:26:29 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754113AbXL1A0U (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Dec 2007 19:26:20 -0500 Received: from idcmail-mo1so.shaw.ca ([24.71.223.10]:36274 "EHLO pd2mo1so.prod.shaw.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753773AbXL1A0T (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Dec 2007 19:26:19 -0500 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2007 18:25:53 -0600 From: Robert Hancock Subject: Re: Suspend code ordering (again) In-reply-to: <200712272100.20282.rjw@sisk.pl> To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Linus Torvalds , Carlos Corbacho , "H. Peter Anvin" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Greg KH , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Len Brown , Andrew Morton , pm list , ACPI Devel Maling List Message-id: <47744291.30100@shaw.ca> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit References: <4773E9EE.40107@shaw.ca> <200712272100.20282.rjw@sisk.pl> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1639 Lines: 34 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> Also, as was pointed out, pre-Vista versions of Windows follow ACPI 1.0 >> and Vista follows 3.0, so 2.0 doesn't really matter since BIOS people >> won't test against it. 1.0 specifies that _PTS is to be called before >> suspending devices and 3.0 says that the AML must not depend on any >> specific device power state, so in both cases it should be safe to call >> _PTS before suspending, no? > > Well, IMO, if we take one option only (whichever that is) and there are systems > that follow the other one, they will likely break. > > Apart from this, there are BIOSes that openly claim ACPI 2.0 support (for > example, the one in my HP nx6325 does that) and they may actually prefer the > post-ACPI-1.0 ordering even if they work with the pre-ACPI-2.0 one. I doubt they would prefer the later ordering in any way that matters, if the Windows version they were designed for uses the earlier ordering. It would be best if somebody could manage to find out what ordering Windows XP (and Windows Vista, for good measure) actually use, then we could just use that. Virtual machine trickery might be an option - the only complication being that it'll be using the DSDT for the fake machine and not the real one.. -- Robert Hancock Saskatoon, SK, Canada To email, remove "nospam" from hancockr@nospamshaw.ca Home Page: http://www.roberthancock.com/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/